The letter was in poor taste and provided a platform for a personal attack on the prime minister. Its casual handling ran counter to policies that counsel restraint, consultation, and sensitivity in such instances. Its problems were compounded by its anonymity.

By the time I had started the second review, CBC Radio Ottawa had acknowledged in correspondence with the complainant that there had been valid concerns about a discussion on the cause of recent riots in England. CBC agreed that a guest had not been an expert on that matter and that his views could have been challenged.

I agreed more could have been done to fulfill policy, including a more timely follow-up to provide a more accurate context concerning the riots. But I found there were mitigating circumstances deserving of consideration in this case. Also, too much time had passed for an effective programming response. In the event of further news developments, I encouraged the program to present stronger journalism.